The Iclif Leadership And Governance CentreThe Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre | The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centrehttp://www.iclif.org
The Iclif Leadership and Governance Centre is an international, Asia-focused centre of excellence committed to delivering practical and relevant solutions-based leadership and corporate governance programmes.Tue, 31 Mar 2015 10:23:26 +0000en-UShourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.55 Keys To High Performancehttp://www.iclif.org/michael-kossler-5-keys-high-performance/
http://www.iclif.org/michael-kossler-5-keys-high-performance/#commentsTue, 15 Jul 2014 22:06:59 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=5395Team success doesn’t start with results. It starts with the building of an effective team that can deliver on its promise. How to Form a Team is for managers and leaders who have responsibility for the creation and success of teams. If you are a department head or project manager, or if you are the senior-level champion or sponsor of a proposed team, this will help you understand the five factors critical to building effective teams and show you how to use those factors to lay the groundwork for successful teams.

]]>Team success doesn’t start with results. It starts with the building of an effective team that can deliver on its promise. How to Form a Team is for managers and leaders who have responsibility for the creation and success of teams. If you are a department head or project manager, or if you are the senior-level champion or sponsor of a proposed team, this will help you understand the five factors critical to building effective teams and show you how to use those factors to lay the groundwork for successful teams.

]]>http://www.iclif.org/michael-kossler-5-keys-high-performance/feed/0Too Many Bosses Too Few Leadershttp://www.iclif.org/many-bosses-leaders/
http://www.iclif.org/many-bosses-leaders/#commentsTue, 15 Jul 2014 21:31:51 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=5390The post Too Many Bosses Too Few Leaders appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>The post Too Many Bosses Too Few Leaders appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>http://www.iclif.org/many-bosses-leaders/feed/0Storytelling As A Communication Toolhttp://www.iclif.org/storytelling-communication-tool/
http://www.iclif.org/storytelling-communication-tool/#commentsTue, 15 Jul 2014 16:56:08 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=5385The post Storytelling As A Communication Tool appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>The post Storytelling As A Communication Tool appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>http://www.iclif.org/storytelling-communication-tool/feed/0Shifting Gearshttp://www.iclif.org/shifting-gears/
http://www.iclif.org/shifting-gears/#commentsThu, 03 Jul 2014 21:53:39 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=5297You’ve had another great year and this time you’ve been assigned the responsibility of leading your own team. How hard can that be, you think to yourself – after all, what is needed is the ability to articulate clearly what is expected and the results should follow. But it’s now three months into the year and you find that things are not working out as you imagined. You are working late every night and running out of energy. The team is still trying to figure out how to work with you and it seems everything needs your attention. You think to yourself, “Work has never been this difficult, so what’s happening here?” For some of you, this scenario is all too familiar, especially if you are a first-time leader. The problem is while we are comfortable doing the things we are good at, first time leadership calls for allocating our time to not only completing the assigned work but helping others to perform successfully as well. The shift now is moving from doing the work yourself to getting work done through others. Click here to read full article >>

]]>You’ve had another great year and this time you’ve been assigned the responsibility of leading your own team. How hard can that be, you think to yourself – after all, what is needed is the ability to articulate clearly what is expected and the results should follow.

But it’s now three months into the year and you find that things are not working out as you imagined. You are working late every night and running out of energy. The team is still trying to figure out how to work with you and it seems everything needs your attention. You think to yourself, “Work has never been this difficult, so what’s happening here?” For some of you, this scenario is all too familiar, especially if you are a first-time leader. The problem is while we are comfortable doing the things we are good at, first time leadership calls for allocating our time to not only completing the assigned work but helping others to perform successfully as well. The shift now is moving from doing the work yourself to getting work done through others.

]]>http://www.iclif.org/shifting-gears/feed/0Be A Sponsor, Be A Leaderhttp://www.iclif.org/be-a-sponsor-be-a-leader/
http://www.iclif.org/be-a-sponsor-be-a-leader/#commentsThu, 15 May 2014 05:38:44 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=5136Understanding how to motivate and manage your top talent is an imperative few business leaders can afford to ignore. Nowhere is this truer than in Asia where top talent is hard to find and employee engagement levels are surprisingly low, hovering in the single digits according to the latest Gallup Global Engagement Survey (2013). The reason for this sorry state of affairs? Leaders who are leading in all the wrong ways: clinging to outmoded “command-and-control” attitudes, oblivious to effective talent strategies, a focus on short term results over long term value creation. One of the keys to engaging and unlocking the full potential of an organisation’s most promising talent is within easy reach: sponsorship. The best leaders in the world are intuitive masters of this important dynamic. Most likely, their own careers have been boosted by powerful sponsors, and in turn, they spend a great deal of energy identifying and investing in top talent. Ken Chenault, CEO of American Express, is a case in point. Chenault often speaks of the pivotal role played by Lou Gerstner, then head of the company’s Travel Related Services (and future CEO of RJR Nabisco and IBM) in his early career. Gerstner recognised Chenault’s talent and […]

]]>Understanding how to motivate and manage your top talent is an imperative few business leaders can afford to ignore. Nowhere is this truer than in Asia where top talent is hard to find and employee engagement levels are surprisingly low, hovering in the single digits according to the latest Gallup Global EngagementSurvey (2013). The reason for this sorry state of affairs? Leaders who are leading in all the wrong ways: clinging to outmoded “command-and-control” attitudes, oblivious to effective talent strategies, a focus on short term results over long term value creation. One of the keys to engaging and unlocking the full potential of an organisation’s most promising talent is within easy reach: sponsorship.

The best leaders in the world are intuitive masters of this important dynamic. Most likely, their own careers have been boosted by powerful sponsors, and in turn, they spend a great deal of energy identifying and investing in top talent. Ken Chenault, CEO of American Express, is a case in point. Chenault often speaks of the pivotal role played by Lou Gerstner, then head of the company’s Travel Related Services (and future CEO of RJR Nabisco and IBM) in his early career. Gerstner recognised Chenault’s talent and encouraged his leadership aspirations, and throughout his extraordinary career Chenault has sought to do the same for others (Vaulting the ColorBar, Center for Talent Innovation, 2012).

So what exactly does a sponsor do?

In her latest book Forget a Mentor, Find a Sponsor (Harvard Business Press, 2013) management guru Sylvia AnnHewlett asks “Who’s pulling for you? Who’s got yourback? Who’s putting your hat in the ring?” The answer:a sponsor. By this definition a sponsor plays a tremendouslyactive role in the career of a “protégé” (from theFrench, “to be protected”, here used as the term todescribe a professional who is sponsored), much moreso than any mentor or other senior level colleague. Asponsor provides advocacy, air cover and opportunitiesfor his or her protégé, and as such is the type of powerfulchampion in the workplace every ambitious executiveneeds.

The language of sponsorship has gained currency in the management literature over the last few years. The subject of a series of large scale research studies, publications on the topic include The Relationship YouNeed to Get Right, Hewlett et al. HBR 2011, Women areOver-Mentored and Under-Sponsored, Herminia Ibarra, HBR 2010, Vaulting the Color Bar, Center for Talent Innovation, 2012. Yet much of thinking on sponsorship has a self-help aspect to it, examining the topic primarily from the protégé perspective, i.e., that of a young executive seeking to land a sponsor as a career development strategy. Less attention is paid, however, to the how’s and the whys a leader needs to focus on to be a good sponsor.

In reality, no one gets to the top alone. Leadership in today’s world involves motivating, inspiring and persuading others to follow, that much is clear. But it is only by being a sponsor, i.e., by “giving back” to the protégé (in ways described in the blue box below) that one gains the loyalty and allegiance needed for large scale impact and talent engagement. Sponsorship, in essence the ability to tap into trustworthy, committed protégés and allies, lies at the heart of effective leadership. The benefits to a leader can be immense. A senior consumer products executive participating in the Catalyst study High Potentials in The Pipeline: Leaders Pay ItForward observes that “Being a sponsor has made me realize the wealth of talent across the organisation that I previously was not exposed to.” “No-one works harder for a sponsor than his or her sponsored talent,” according to a leader interviewed by Hewlett for her book.

So how can leaders in Asia better manage talent, i.e., attract and retain the best and the brightest and engage talent more fully to enhance productivity and performance? By better building and deploying their relationship capital through sponsorship.

A Win-Win For All

The good news is that sponsorship is a win-win for all concerned. Talented employees the world over are hungry for opportunities to develop, grow and learn, and having access to sponsors can spur greater engagement and commitment across an organisation.

Leaders on the other hand need to attract, retain and inspire top talent and sponsorship provides a powerful means of doing so. Sponsorship, in other words, is a dynamic every leader needs to activate in order to go from being a good leader to a great one.

]]>http://www.iclif.org/be-a-sponsor-be-a-leader/feed/0Resolving Team Dynamicshttp://www.iclif.org/resolving-team-dynamics/
http://www.iclif.org/resolving-team-dynamics/#commentsMon, 28 Apr 2014 11:14:11 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=4834The post Resolving Team Dynamics appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>The post Resolving Team Dynamics appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>http://www.iclif.org/resolving-team-dynamics/feed/0Quantum Mechanics, Spirituality and Leadershiphttp://www.iclif.org/quantum-mechanics-spirituality-and-leadership/
http://www.iclif.org/quantum-mechanics-spirituality-and-leadership/#commentsSun, 20 Apr 2014 10:45:39 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=4760For two decades, I’ve puzzled over a fundamental paradox: on the one hand, companies globally spend billions each year on leadership development, yet on the other hand most continue to report an acute shortage of good leaders within their ranks. After much research and practical experience, I am becoming increasingly convinced that we may be looking for leadership advice in too narrow a space. Instead of just management and psychology books (and training programs) produced largely by business school professors, the secret of great leadership might lie at the confluence of quantum mechanics, neuroscience, biology and spirituality. Let’s first dispel some common misconceptions about leadership, then consider an alternative point of view. I begin with two quick leadership stories, one each from Japan and the US. The Fall and Rise of Honda Soichiro Honda was born in 1906 and grew up helping his father repair bicycles in Komyo village (now called Tenryu City) Japan. While still at engineering school, he started a workshop with the intention of developing a piston ring for sale to Toyota. He worked day and night to produce what he believed to be the perfect design, often sleeping on the workshop floor. Facing considerable financial hardship […]

]]>For two decades, I’ve puzzled over a fundamental paradox: on the one hand, companies globally spend billions each year on leadership development, yet on the other hand most continue to report an acute shortage of good leaders within their ranks. After much research and practical experience, I am becoming increasingly convinced that we may be looking for leadership advice in too narrow a space. Instead of just management and psychology books (and training programs) produced largely by business school professors, the secret of great leadership might lie at the confluence of quantum mechanics, neuroscience, biology and spirituality.

Let’s first dispel some common misconceptions about leadership, then consider an alternative point of view. I begin with two quick leadership stories, one each from Japan and the US.

The Fall and Rise of Honda

Soichiro Honda was born in 1906 and grew up helping his father repair bicycles in Komyo village (now called Tenryu City) Japan. While still at engineering school, he started a workshop with the intention of developing a piston ring for sale to Toyota. He worked day and night to produce what he believed to be the perfect design, often sleeping on the workshop floor. Facing considerable financial hardship during this period, he had to sell his wife’s jewelry to raise capital. When he finally completed his design and took the finished piston ring to Toyota, he was told that the work was not up to their standards. While a bit disappointed, he believed strongly in his idea and refused to give up. Amidst ridicule from fellow engineering students and teachers alike, Honda toiled for a further two years before finally winning a contract from Toyota. By this time Japan was gearing up for war and he found it increasingly difficult to find building materials for his factory for manufacturing the piston rings. Yet he persevered, finding a new way of making concrete, and finished building the factory.

Sadly, this was not the end of Honda’s troubles. The factory he had worked so hard to build was bombed twice during the war, and steel became unavailable. While most would have relented at this time, Honda stayed focused on his dream and found a way around the steel problem. He started collecting gasoline cans discarded by US fighters to help regenerate his factory. As he started rebuilding, a massive earthquake destroyed it completely. This setback would have quelled the will of the most ardent of self-believers, but Honda was in no mood to throw in the towel even then. He forged ahead. After the war, he found a way of attaching a small engine onto his bicycle, and found that people were fascinated by this strange new idea. By this time however he had no financial means to fund mass production. Rather than giving up, he wrote to 18,000 bicycle shop owners asking them to invest in his idea. With the numerous small investments he received, and after several redesigns, he finally came up with “Super Cub” which went on to become an overnight success.

By 1963 Honda was the top-selling motorcycle brand in the US, and the company now employs over a 100,000 employees worldwide.

The Magic of Walt Disney

Walter Disney is well known for his colossal legacy. Less known are the struggles, trials and tribulations he went through before Disney Studios and Disneyland became household names. Trouble began early when, one by one his brothers ran away from home due to difficult relationships with their father. Eager to follow in their footsteps, Disney lied about his age to enter the army but was rejected. His eventual ticket out was a job with the Red Cross as an ambulance driver in France. He returned home at age 19 and told his parents he wanted to be an artist. His father would hear none of it, so the young Disney moved to Kansas City to work at the Gray Advertising Company for $50 a month. However, only a few months later, he was let go. Jobless and penniless again, he then started the Laugh-O-Gram company with a friend. Though the cartoons they created were somewhat successful, distributors were more interested in acquiring the work than paying for it. At age 22 Disney put Laugh-O-Gram up for bankruptcy.
The next few years were tough, and at times Disney barely had enough money for food. Eventually when he could save up enough for a trip, Walt joined his brother Roy in Hollywood where he launched his next creation, the cartoon character Oswald the Rabbit. This venture established Disney as a leading cartoonist in the country. But when he fought his distributors for more money so that he could perfect the art and technology of creating cartoons, they were uninterested. When he threatened to take Oswald elsewhere, he learned that Oswald the Rabbit, and all the artists in his studio belonged to the distributor, not him. Thanks to some fine print he had not paid attention to, his creation and staff were taken from right under his nose.

After going through a rough patch (which he called “one heck of a breakdown”), Disney created Mickey Mouse, which finally brought him lasting success. He still had many critics and naysayers: some told him Snow White was terrible, and advised not to go ahead with the project. He ignored them and persisted, only to prove that it was a huge hit. Later when he was working on his pet Disneyland Park project, most well-wishers told him it was a bad idea and discouraged him from pursuing it. They were certain it would bankrupt Walt Disney Studios. Again, he stuck to his vision and completed the park. The franchise continues to expand globally to this day, with the Florida resort alone receiving 52.5 million visitors annually.

Leadership Myths and Reality

To most people, someone in a powerful position of authority is automatically a leader. Consequently, leadership is seen simply as the ability to get people to do what the ‘leader’ wants them to do, often with the help of the powerful position he occupies. By this logic, did Honda and Disney become leaders only after they created their empires? Did they toil endlessly only to acquire the authority to get people to do what they wanted them to do? Yes, it is true that a leader must convince others to follow him or her, but is that the main purpose of leadership? If you answered the three questions with a ‘no,’ then what is good leadership after all?
We find that all great leaders have two things in common:

1. A burning desire to create a better future
2. The ability to stay the course even in the face of the most formidable of resistance

It is the strength of these two elements that attracts willing followers to them, rather than their position of authority. Gandhi and Mandela in the political/social arena, and Howard Schultz, Steve Jobs, Jack Ma and many others in the business arena were considered great leaders not because of their position, authority, appearance, personality, management techniques or heredity, but because they created better futures for people around them. And no matter how tough the going got, they never gave up.
Soichiro Honda and Walt Disney were no different. Despite a rough childhood, early bankruptcy, loss of his own creations and staff, and a slew of critics who called his biggest project – the Disneyland Park – Walt’s Folly, Disney never gave up. As he himself said, “All the adversity and troubles I’ve had in my life have strengthened me…. You may not realize it when it happens, but sometimes a kick in the teeth may be the best thing for you.” Despite all his early failures and setbacks, Honda too never gave up. His oft-cited quote says it all: “Success is 99% failure.”

Another common misstep in leadership studies is to solely consider the experiences and views of followers. If you ask employees what more they want from their bosses, the average person wants more compassion, understanding, fairness etc. While there is nothing wrong with this list of attributes, few followers identify/emphasize the real leadership mission – creating a better future. Unfortunately huge investments are made in employee engagement surveys and subsequent training programs to make bosses more like what their followers want them to be. Although leaders certainly need to understand employee engagement drivers, that is merely one aspect of leadership. Before focusing on employees, the leader must dream up the better future he or she wants to create.

]]>http://www.iclif.org/quantum-mechanics-spirituality-and-leadership/feed/0Muhammad Sabri in INTANhttp://www.iclif.org/muhammad-sabri-in-intan/
http://www.iclif.org/muhammad-sabri-in-intan/#commentsFri, 11 Apr 2014 12:24:20 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=4515The post Muhammad Sabri in INTAN appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>The post Muhammad Sabri in INTAN appeared first on The Iclif Leadership And Governance Centre.
]]>http://www.iclif.org/muhammad-sabri-in-intan/feed/0Leadership Consciousnesshttp://www.iclif.org/leadership-consciousness/
http://www.iclif.org/leadership-consciousness/#commentsWed, 23 Oct 2013 16:33:25 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=3283For almost twenty years, my work has given me the opportunity to help people who want to live and lead at a higher level. Every week my colleagues and I at The Iclif Leadership & Governance Center (www.iclif.org) have the privilege to meet a new set of people in our programs, seminars and research work. Our participants are professionals working in large and small companies, civil servants, and entrepreneurs from around the world. While their professional, ethnic and personal backgrounds are very different, we help them to identify the existential level at which they are living, and help clarify for them their highest option. The three levels at which people most commonly exist are: Jungle Existence, Duty Trap, or Duty Ethic. Let me briefly describe what I mean by these labels, , and then paint a picture of a fourth level rarely experienced but that brings true success, happiness and meaning to life. Jungle Existence This is the most basic level of living. At this level, all one is concerned about is maximizing food, clothing, shelter, and material pleasure. We call this Jungle Existence because animals in the jungle focus only on food, safety and pleasure. Nothing wrong with this […]

]]>For almost twenty years, my work has given me the opportunity to help people who want to live and lead at a higher level. Every week my colleagues and I at The Iclif Leadership & Governance Center (www.iclif.org) have the privilege to meet a new set of people in our programs, seminars and research work. Our participants are professionals working in large and small companies, civil servants, and entrepreneurs from around the world. While their professional, ethnic and personal backgrounds are very different, we help them to identify the existential level at which they are living, and help clarify for them their highest option. The three levels at which people most commonly exist are: Jungle Existence, Duty Trap, or Duty Ethic. Let me briefly describe what I mean by these labels, , and then paint a picture of a fourth level rarely experienced but that brings true success, happiness and meaning to life.

Jungle Existence

This is the most basic level of living. At this level, all one is concerned about is maximizing food, clothing, shelter, and material pleasure. We call this Jungle Existence because animals in the jungle focus only on food, safety and pleasure. Nothing wrong with this level: Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs shows we must satisfy all five types of human needs starting with the most basic ones: Biological & Physiological (air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep etc.) and Safety (Protection from elements, security, law & order, stability etc.). Too many people however remain stuck at this level forever, pursuing greater levels of material comforts, seemingly without end. For them, enough is never enough, and there is no other purpose in life except to accumulate more power and more products. Unfortunately, the more they accumulate, the less satisfaction they derive. Others move on to higher levels once their basic needs are met, and some do so even before that.

The Stoic philosopher Seneca is believed to have said, “It is not the man who has too little, but the man who craves more, that is poor.” If the common belief is true – that human consciousness is higher than that of other animals – then one can argue that the very essence of being human is to aspire towards levels of living that are higher than Jungle Existence.

The Duty Trap

An unusually large proportion of people seem trapped at the level we call The Duty Trap. In our programs, we typically ask people to tell us what is most important to them in life. Since many have not thought through the question before, the most common answer we get is ‘family.’ This answer also tracks with Maslow’s hierarchy. After the biological/physiological and safety needs are met, Maslow talks about the need for Belonging and Love (Work groups, family, affection, relationships etc.). But consider this: when we push people to tell us what they really want out of life, what purpose they want to pursue, and the legacy they want to leave behind, what we hear from people at this level is: I really want to pursue my dream of (this or that) but unfortunately, I cannot, because I have to provide for my family. I cannot take any unnecessary risks because of my duty to my family. The implication? I am helpless. Essentially, in this mode, the individual develops a victim mentality, and, ironically, family is often used as an excuse to not push oneself higher. Again, there is nothing nobler than making a few sacrifices to provide for the family’s well-being, but remaining forever in victim mode is no good for oneself nor the family. At this level, the primary view of life is that of a glass half empty.

The Duty Ethic

The third level of living is The Duty Ethic. Here, one is more in pro-active control of one’s life. Rather than feeling like a victim of circumstance, one’s self talk is as follows:

“It is my duty to provide for the family and I relish this role”

“I also have a professional role and I will do it to the best of my ability”

And additionally for the religiously inclined, “It is also my duty to serve God, and I choose to do so with full heart.”

People at this level usually see life as a glass half full. Rather than sinking into the hopelessness of the tough hand one has been dealt with, here they ask themselves: What else can I do to positively influence the situation? Here, one begins to address Maslow’s higher needs of Esteem (Self-esteem, achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, managerial responsibility etc.) and Self Actualization (Realizing one’s potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth, peak performance etc.)

Fortunately, we find that a good number of people we meet live at the Duty Ethic level. While this is good news, there is an even higher level of living, one we call a ‘Purpose & Values’ Life. At this level one leads a life, rather than just lives it.

A Life of Purpose & Values

As you can see from the diagram above, a ‘purpose & values’ life goes well beyond the Duty Ethic. Here, the basic aim of life is to leave the world a slightly better place for others. Instead of living at the previous three levels which are largely self and family centric, the fourth level calls for much greater other-centricity. People at this level are passionate about creating a better future for others around them – others beyond immediate family. They are more concerned with giving rather than getting from society.

The story of Nipun Mehta, a Computer Science and Philosophy graduate of UC Berkley is a great illustration. Starting his software career at Sun Microsystems in the third year of college, Nipun became increasingly uncomfortable with the dot-com greed of the late 90s. One day, along with three friends, he went to a homeless shelter to experience “giving with absolutely no strings attached,” and ended up creating a website for the shelter at no cost. The four friends started ServiceSpace which over the years built thousands of free websites for non-profits, and also started several giving projects like DailyGood, KarmaTube, KarmaKitchen Restautants, and a pay-it-forward rickshaw in India. They experienced so much satisfaction and joy in such giving that in 2001, Nipun quit his job at the age of 25 to become a fulltime volunteer, with no plan of survival beyond six months. He has since become a prominent leader in the non-profit space and has received several awards including the Jefferson Award for Public Service and the President’s Volunteer Service Award. His life’s mission statement now reads as “Bring smiles in the world and stillness in my heart.” To understand the idea of ‘giving in order to receive,’ click on http://binged.it/1ftLfyG and listen to this 20 minute speech he gave – it may change the way you think about life forever.

How did a 25 year old with no clear idea about how to meet the lowest level of needs on the Maslow scale jump straight to a ‘purpose & values’ life? Simply put, he answered the following questions for himself:

What are my deeply held values?
What mismatches between current reality and my values move me the most?
What life purpose can I pursue to make a positive difference to current reality?
The moment one finds answers to these questions, one uncovers almost limitless inner energy to act and not give up. We call such energy Leadership Energy, which is the fuel that drives people to create a better future for others.

A ‘purpose & values’ life is not just about charity. Mehta’s example happens to be focused on charity, but by answering the same questions, business leaders like Howard Schultz of Starbucks (SBUX -1.03%), Tony Fernandes of AirAsia, and Jack Ma of Alibaba created better futures for people while still pursuing commercial goals. Schultz created the first company in America to provide full healthcare benefits even to part-time workers. Fernandes democratized air travel in Asia, and Ma gave a voice platform to small and medium sized businesses. Other examples include societal leaders like Gandhi and Mandela who created better futures for their countries by fighting injustice at great personal risk and sacrifice. So a ‘purpose & values’ life comes in all shapes and forms. The key is to find answers to the three questions above, and get started. My own decision to quit a career of currency trading in favor of research and executive education on leadership was powered by the answers I found for myself. While the answers did not come easily, I can vouch from personal experience that Nipun Mehta is absolutely right when he says in his speech, “May you discover that to be truly selfish, you must be generous. In giving, may you fully experience what it means to receive.”

]]>http://www.iclif.org/leadership-consciousness/feed/0Trust:The Currency Of Leadershiphttp://www.iclif.org/trustthe-currency-of-leadership/
http://www.iclif.org/trustthe-currency-of-leadership/#commentsFri, 04 Oct 2013 06:22:38 +0000http://www.iclif.org/?p=3134Almost all 30 executives named their mothers as one of their three choices, with fathers running a close second. The third choice varied among best friend, brother, sister, spouse, or a religious figure. Think about this for a moment. We spend the vast majority of our waking hours at work, yet not one of the participants included a boss or co-worker among the most trusted people in their lives. When my colleague handed the floor to me, I jettisoned my lesson plan. Instead, I dug deeper into the trust question. My question became: “Who are three people currently in your life upon whom your happiness and well-being most depends?” You guess it: every single one of them listed their boss as one of them. Imagine! The one person most people’s well-being depends upon the most does not make it to their most trusted list. There were lots of opinions about why bosses don’t appear in the trust list – we had a very robust and animat- ed discussion on it. Comments ranged from “My boss has no idea how hard I work to get things done here” to “All he cares about is results against stated goals so he can […]

Almost all 30 executives named their mothers as one of their three choices, with fathers running a close second. The third choice varied among best friend, brother, sister, spouse, or a religious figure. Think about this for a moment. We spend the vast majority of our waking hours at work, yet not one of the participants included a boss or co-worker among the most trusted people in their lives.

When my colleague handed the floor to me, I jettisoned my lesson plan. Instead, I dug deeper into the trust question. My question became: “Who are three people currently in your life upon whom your happiness and well-being most depends?” You guess it: every single one of them listed their boss as one of them.

Imagine! The one person most people’s well-being depends upon the most does not make it to their most trusted list.

There were lots of opinions about why bosses don’t appear in the trust list – we had a very robust and animat- ed discussion on it. Comments ranged from “My boss has no idea how hard I work to get things done here” to “All he cares about is results against stated goals so he can keep his superiors happy… when was the last time he got his own hands dirty?” After about twenty minutes, I finally got to the point I wanted to make all along. Suppose the class were filled with their subordi- nates, and suppose we asked them the same questions?

“Would you figure in your subordinates’ top three most trusted list?” I asked. Pin drop silence. Next, I asked if they should be in the list, and they agreed that they should indeed. “Why?” I asked. The group intuitive- ly concluded that high trust between them and their subordinates would equate to higher team and individual performance, and lower stress for all parties.

Granted, there are plenty of bosses that indeed should not be trusted. These are self-centred people who abuse their authority for personal gain. I have no advice for such bosses other than that they should take a hard look in the mirror. But if you the type of boss that genuinely cares for his people, and believes in the power of collaborative performance, read on.

The logic is simple. If people trust you, they will give their 110% to their work. I remember a few years ago while I was working at a global bank, I ran into trouble with a couple of powerful people who (due to their own insecurities) did not want my function to succeed. It got to a point that the huge amount of time I had to spend on watching out for land mines began to impact my work, and the work of my team as a whole. Sounds familiar? Luckily, I had a boss I could trust. I opened up to her, and she assured me that she would watch my back and take care of the issues. Based on her assurance, I went back to work with full en- ergy, and my team and I ended up creating amazing results for the bank. Years later, when one of my subordinates was struggling to convince his peers about approaching a project in line with his suggestions, I was able to pay that trust forward. My subordinate was worried that his peers would complain to me about him being obstinate, and not a team player. He could not tolerate the thought of me (his boss) thinking of him as un-collaborative. At the same time, he was convinced that if his suggestions were imple- mented, our company would easily move ahead of compe- tition. Sensing his struggle, I called him to my office for a chat, and told him that I trusted him completely. “Be your normal collaborative self, listen to what your peers have to say, and if you are still convinced, remain firm on your sug- gestions. If they still think of you as stubborn, don’t worry, we will correct that perception later,” I told him. He did ex- actly that and the project was a huge success, and was im- plemented in record time. Later, his peers understood too.

In his book The Speed Of Trust, Stephen M.R. Covey points out that high trust equals high speed and low cost, whereas low trust means low speed and high cost. He cites the case of aviation security in the US. Prior to 9/11 one could reach the airport just half an hour before flight time and easily make it on board. Why? Because people had a high degree of trust in aviation security. Now it takes anywhere from 1.5 to 2 hours. While the extra security measures have made flying safer, Covey points out that the added cost of TSA security ultimately shows up on every airline ticket. In an- other example, Covey sites the added time and money costs of implementing the Sarbenes-Oxley Act which was designed to improve trust in public markets in the wake of the Enron and Wordcom scandals. On the other hand, he gives the example of Warren Buffet deciding to acquire McLane Distribution – a $23billion company – from Wal-Mart in just one two-hour meeting because of high trust between Berkshire Hathaway and Wal-Mart. Besides the speedy conclusion of the deal, both companies saved millions of dollars in legal and investment banker fees.

A team with high trust will similarly produce results faster and at lower cost. It is clear that trust is one of the keys to organisational or group performance. I therefore call it the currency of leadership. But can bosses ever make the Most Trusted list? Does the authority that bosses have over their subordinates automatically make them untrust- worthy in the eyes of subordinates? As one participant put it, “Besides being good to them, I also have to ensure discipline in my team, and I need to provide tough construc- tive feedback when needed. This automatically puts me at a disadvantage when it comes to winning their trust….. no matter what you do, no matter how fair you are, the moment they take one tough stand, bosses are seen as self- centered, authoritative, and therefore untrustworthy…..” After grappling with this issue for quite a while, I have to admit there is at least some truth in what this participant said. Let’s take a very real scenario. One of your direct reports has been under-performing for a while now. You have invested in training, coaching and have given them a lot of direct feedback on how to improve, but have seen no improvement. You are now convinced that he is a misfit on your team, and needs to be let go. Even if you handle the conversation (of letting him go) in the nicest possible way, what are the chances that he will trust your judgment and respect the fact that you gave him every possible opportu- nity to succeed?

Even in situations that don’t demand firing someone, the chances of earning the trust of a subordinate with less than stellar performance are low. As a manager, you will need to give tough feedback, and demand higher levels of per- formance. Very few people have high enough maturity and self-awareness to fairly judge their boss’ behavior towards them. Let’s face it, it is much easier to blame the boss than to accept responsibility for your own performance.

So what are bosses to do here? Should bosses give up on trying to earn their subordinates’ trust? Clearly, that would be a shame in light of our “high trust = high performance and low cost” argument above. One idea to maximize trust, and therefore performance, in your team might be the 20:60:20 strategy:

Ensure your highest performing and most dedicated (top 20%) subordinates trust you without a doubt

Maintain a reasonably high level of trust with yoursolid citizens (the middle 60%) – subordinates thatare good but not great

Don’t invest too much time trying to get your bottom20% to trust you

If you are wondering why the 20:60:20 strategy and why not 100:0, you have a legitimate question. Here’s my perspective: In most organisations, the 80:20 rule ap- plies, meaning that 20% or the people produce 80% of the results. To this rule of thumb, add the fact that the top 20% need to be supported by the next 60% in order for the organisation to achieve its full potential, it is easy to see why it is a good idea to focus on the next 60 as well. As for the bottom 20, well, no matter how much you try, not everyone will love you. Trying to win the trust of your least productive people is, unfortunately, not an efficient use of time and effort, particularly for today’s time starved business leaders.

EARNING TRUST

Now, if you buy the above arguments (that trust is the currency of leadership and that leaders need to at least ensure they have the trust of the 20+60%), then another key question emerges – how can leaders best earn the trust of their subordinates? While the answer differs according to context, I have generally observed that leadership trust is a combination of six factors: Commitment, Character, Competence, Consistency, Caring, and Centricity. Let me explain each of them briefly.

1. COMMITMENT

Commitment is the cause or purpose the leader pursues. It is the vision she has for a better future. If this vision pro- vides hope and inspiration to people, they willingly give their trust (and followership) to her. On the other hand, if they don’t connect with the leader’s vision at an emotional level, or doubt the commitment of the leader towards the vision, they will find it difficult to trust the leader. Commit- ment towards a purpose is the primary driver of leadership trust. If one is to follow a leader with full commitment, there should be no doubt that the leader is also fully committed to the stated purpose.

What is your leadership purpose? Are you fully dedicated to it?

2. CHARACTER

Next is Character, which is the set of values that the lead- er lives by. Not only is it important for followers to know that the leader is committed to a worthy purpose, they must also believe that the leader wants to pursue that purpose by playing according to the right set of values. Imagine two leaders are fighting for a just cause that you strongly be- lieve in. One is pursuing success through violent means, while the other is using peaceful means. Which one will you trust more and follow? The answer will depend on your own set of values. My goal here is not to differentiate between right and wrong. Rather, it is to highlight the fact that char- acter (deeply held values) plays a huge role in earning trust.

What are your deeply held values that you will never compromise, no matter what?

3. COMPETENCE

In today’s increasingly complex world, just having strong people skills is not enough. To earn trust, a leader must have core competence in her chosen field. The old school of management says that a general manager need not be a subject matter expert. In today’s highly complex markets, it has become almost impossible for a rank outsider who does not have sufficient knowledge and expertise about the business to earn the respect of his subordinates.

Do you have core competence in your chosen field? Does your level of expertise attract people to work on your team?

4. CONSISTENCY

Consistency is about delivering on your commitments with- out fail. If you do what you say, and deliver what you prom- ise, people will trust you. If you don’t, they won’t. Simple. Let’s face it, it is hard to trust someone who is inconsist- ent with their dependability. In today’s increasingly competi- tive world of business there is very little room for error. One member’s inconsistency can cost the entire team dearly.

Do you keep your word and deliver what you promise al- most all the time, regardless of circumstances?

5. CARING

There are two types of bosses in the world, ones that gen- uinely care for their people and others that don’t. If I know that my boss will always take care of my best interests, I will be more willing to give her my very best efforts and energy. If, on the other hand, I have a boss that is likely to throw me under the bus to save his own skin, I will use a big part of my energy in taking care of myself.

Do you truly care for your people, and do they know that you do? Do you feel their pain, and do you derive intrin- sic pleasure from enabling their success?

6. CENTRICITY

Finally, the focus of the boss’ actions and intentions deter- mines his trust worthiness. Some bosses are self-centric and some are other-centric. Self-centric people care most about themselves, and strive hard to create a better future for themselves. In the words of Adam Grant, author of Give and Take, such people are Takers i.e. they take more from society than they give. Their worldview is one of self-pres- ervation: “If I don’t take care of myself and maximise my own gain, no one else will.” Other-centric people are Givers i.e. they give more than they take from society. Their world- view is one of win-win: “If I take care of others, my interests will be taken care of automatically.” It is well documented through research that Givers enjoy a much higher level of trust from their subordinates than Takers; and that in the long run, Givers are more successful.

Are you self-centric or other-centric? Are you a Giver or a Taker?

Earning the trust of one’s subordinates is not just a soft, nice-to-have asset. It is hard currency that can make the difference between success and failure. There are hardly any professions today in which individuals can be success- ful without the help of team members. To ensure you have enough trust from your subordinates, consider the 20:60:20 strategy and make sure your top 20% performers fully trust you, and the next 60% adequately respect you. A good place to start might be to try and honestly answer each of the six-C questions. Just as you can assess your own trustwor- thiness by honestly reflecting on the six-C questions, you can also use them to assess the trustworthiness of others.